Froch did not beat Dirrell contrary to what his nuthuggers might say

Well if that's true then Bute's opponents are journeyman. Don't critisize Froch because Booty is a coward.

 

The first ''win'' over Andrade is about as hollow a win as you can get.

 

:deal

 

Dirrell exposed Froch's limitations and won according to each of the following:

- effective aggression
- clean, hard punching
- defence
- ring-generalship

...but he also fought a very negative fight, making the judges sick of him...

...in any case, Dirrell didn't CLEARLY win. It was a close fight.

 

Depends on how you define close. I don't think winning by 2-3 rounds is that close.

 

This content is protected

 

Jeez... British Forum even worse than I remembered... even the crappy General Forum has fewer idiots per square inch.:good

 

None of these cats are on SOG's level anyway.

 

Well **** off back to the General and make the British forum a little better then. :good

 

Son of Showtime don't want none of this guy.

This content is protected

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARs8axyaDz0[/ame]

You know where the General is...

 

I remember punch stats coming out after the fight, and I think Froch actually outlanded Dirrell. But it was a horrible, close fight. Froch was awarded for being the aggressor because Dirrell didn't want to engage early on. In the later rounds Dirrell was the better fighter. But those early rounds counted against him. I felt Dirrell had taken it by a point but was glad Froch won. It was a victory against whiny little babies.

 

I don't think there were any official punchstats as far as I'm aware. Just what people have made up.

 

According to BoxRec:

Blows: Froch 153/475 32%; Dirrell 105/315 33%.

 

Interesting to know BoxRec records punch stats although i'd question their reliability.